Sandra Fluke: I will not be silenced

posted at 3:05 pm on March 13, 2012 by Tina Korbe

Sandra Fluke is clearly not concerned about the risk of overexposure — but she might not need to be. Liberal outlets continue to praise her as the mainstream voice that will end sexual shaming and usher in a new era of respect for the “reproductive rights” of women. For those of us who disagree with her, though, this debate is getting old primarily because it’s going nowhere.

Most recently, Fluke authored an op-ed for CNN to restate the case that she thinks has been so distorted by talkers and writers on the right. Here’s an excerpt:

These attempts to silence women and the men who support them have clearly failed. I know this because I have received so many messages of support from across the country — women and men speaking out because they agree that contraception needs to be treated as a basic health care service.

Who are these supporters?

They are women with polycystic ovarian syndrome, who need contraception to prevent cysts from growing on their ovaries, which if unaddressed can lead to infertility and deadly ovarian cancer. They are sexual assault victims, who need contraception to prevent unwanted pregnancy.

They are Catholic women, who see no conflict between their social justice -based faith and family planning. They are new moms, whose doctors fear that another pregnancy too soon could jeopardize the mother’s health and the potential child’s health too. They are mothers and grandmothers who remember all too well what it was like to be called names decades ago, when they were fighting for a job, for health care benefits, for equality.

They are husbands, partners, boyfriends and male friends who know that without access to contraception, the women they care about can face unfair obstacles to participating in public life. And yes, they are young women of all income levels, races, classes and ethnicities who need access to contraception to control their reproduction, pursue their education and career goals and prevent unintended pregnancy. And they will not be silenced.

It’s a well-written op-ed, but, for those who saw her testimony or who have followed the subsequent controversy, it’s not worth reading in its entirety. Why? It says nothing new.

Fluke doesn’t seem to grasp that anyone could have heard her arguments and actually disagreed with them. Her premise is still that women have a right to insurance that covers contraception because they have a right to have sex without the fear of pregnancy.

Fluke shows very little respect for reality. The reality is that (a) the exercise of a right generally doesn’t cost somebody else something and, if it does, that might be a clue the so-called “right” is not actually a right and (b) the only completely foolproof way to prevent pregnancy is to abstain from sex. The possibility of pregnancy — even with contraception — is part of the reality of sex.

Fluke thinks objectors don’t understand that she’s not asking taxpayers to directly subsidize her birth control. She’s asking insurance companies to include contraception coverage in the plans they develop for clients (a.k.a. religious employers) that don’t want contraception coverage included in the plans. That shows little respect for the prerogative of the insurance company to include in its plans whatever it wants to assume risk for — and no more. It shows little respect for the prerogative of an employer to negotiate for a group rate for a plan that doesn’t violate his conscience. If Fluke and her Georgetown classmates want to purchase insurance that covers contraception, they are free to do so — such plans exist to meet the demand — but they are not then free to avail themselves of the group insurance rate negotiated for by an employer that opposes contraception for religious reasons. Simple enough.

Women who have sex when they’re not in a position to become pregnant are engaging in a risky behavior that triggers the need for contraception. Women like that on an insurance plan that does cover contraception are driving premiums up for everyone on that plan. As a woman who is not engaging in that risky behavior, I’d like to have the option to purchase an insurance plan that doesn’t cover contraception.

***

Like Fluke, I am not alone. Who are the people who share my opinion?

They are women with polycystic ovarian syndrome, who use one of the many other forms of medication available to treat their condition. They are sexual assault victims, who, in the midst of the horror and trauma they’ve experienced, find healing in the embrace of life and the love of a child.

They are Catholic women who affirm the Church’s teaching on contraception, recognizing that openness to life in all its fullness is the fundamental posture from which to engage reality. They are new moms who use natural methods or breast feeding to space the births of their children — and exult in how “in tune” with their bodies they become as a result. They are mothers and grandmothers who remember all too well what it was like to be denigrated by their fellow women for their decision to be at-home wives and the primary caretakers of their children.

They are husbands, partners, boyfriends and male friends who respect a woman’s fertility, who recognize that pregnancy is a possibility even with contraception and are ready and willing to embrace the responsibility of fatherhood and/or committed to forgoing sex if they’re not. And yes, they are young women of all income levels, races, classes and ethnicities who choose to wait to have sex until they are prepared for whatever the consequences of the decision to have sex might be. And we will not be silenced.

***

This is not a plea for Sandra Fluke to become like me. It is a plea for her and for others like her to recognize that (a) some men and women legitimately object to contraception on religious grounds and (b) to recognize that some women — even women who don’t object to contraception in general — legitimately do not think all insurance plans should be made by the federal government to cover contraception. It is a plea for her torespect that.

Before Rush Limbaugh called Sandra Fluke a “sl-t” and a “prostitute,” I watched the video of her testimony. Based on the evidence of that testimony, I didn’t think she was either of the words Rush Limbaugh used, but I thought she was unbelievably spoiled and disdainful of the opinions of others. Nothing that I have seen or read since then has changed my opinion of her. How I’d love for something to change it now!

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Fluke doesn’t seem to grasp that anyone could have heard her arguments and actually disagreed with them. Her premise is still that women have a right to insurance that covers contraception because they have a right to have sex without the fear of pregnancy.

As long as they start off with the premise that contraception, birth control pills specifically = women’s healthcare we can go no further in the discussion. Antibiotics are healthcare. Birth controls pills are not, no matter how many times they repeat it.

Great gal, keep your krap before the public as long as you want! The 1st is yours as is Rush’s 1st? All your are doing, you dainty little twinkie, you are making a complete fool of yourself, IMO! May you, twinkie, go down the same dark never to be heard from again after your ten minutes of fame?
L

Thanks, Rush – If only you had refrained from running off at the mouth and using the “S” word, this woman would have disappeared quickly back into the mist. Now we’ll never be free of her and her nonsense.

These attempts to silence women and the men who support them have clearly failed. I know this because I have received so many messages of support from across the country — women and men speaking out because they agree that contraception needs to be treated as a basic health care service.
=======================================

Soooooooooo many messages from her supporters,and from
the Pressitutes!!

This is not a plea for Sandra Fluke to become like me. It is a plea for her and for others like her to recognize that

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences. -CS Lewis

The heading of the article seems to imply that we, the public, are trying to silence Ms. Fluke. By all means! Talk away! I’d really rather have an honest disclosure of your feelings on the matter Ms. Fluke, but let’s call this (for better need of a word) act for what it was: A publicity stunt that a few democrats in the House used to deflect the real issues with the HHS mandate AND to violate the Catholic Church’s first amendment right.

Women have put up with misogyny from the right for so long. About time someone spoke up.

liberal4life on March 13, 2012 at 3:10 PM

As opposed to the hidden misogyny of the left, where they will say whatever sounds good as long as you keep providing the BJs whenever they want. Explain to me how Bill Clinton, John Edwards, JFK, Ted Kennedy – hell most of the Kennedy clan – are NOT misogynists. How much actual respect did any of those guys have for the women in their lives?

Sandra Fluke stamping her feet, I said GIMMIE, GIMMIE, GIMMIE. You owe me (Catholic Church) I am attending an elite law school you gave me a scholarship to attend. You Christian clergy, yeah you, you are gonna pay for my contraception, now put up and shut up. Pay up suckas!

Sandra Fluke is the model Welfare Queen for the 21st Century. Upper middle class to start, going to a very expensive (and very liberal law) school on scholarship, and now (as we know from news reports) a tool of the White House media shop. She won’t have kids like the old-style welfare queens. Instead, she will first absorb all the government benefits she can while in school, and then work for a liberal law firm or political organization as a political activist. Or she may become another trusted lieutenant of Eric Holder at Justice. She is a product of the American version of the cradle-through-career indoctrination and career of the old Soviet Komsomol.

I’m sure Ms. Fluke is a fine person who is unfailingly kind to children, dogs and old people. However, she is petitioning the government to use the threat of violence in order to coerce people into doing things that are contrary to their moral beliefs. I would hope she could come up with a better argument than “I will not be silenced”.

Government stay out of my womb and my body except when I want you to pay for my sexual behavior…

I am an empowered woman who needs daddy government to pay for my sexual freedom…

Wahh!

melle1228 on March 13, 2012 at 3:16 PM

Great post.

Plus, these Socialists demand their privacy! … by reducing every American to ObamuhCare – where every medical record will be subject to State scrutiny, and where every medical decision will be subject to the yea-or-nay of a State appointed panel.

She should start a club with Cindy Sheehan, Sluts United AND the feminists who are boycotting sex. Oh and toss in Steinem and Fonda.

They all make a lot of noise, but in the end they’re just clowns.

And Tina, did she not use the term “we” when discussing the sexual proclivities of both herself and her (maybe mythical) friends?

You may not have taken her words that way, but as I have learned from almost 30 years with Mrs. Dog, we all tend to process what we hear differently. The transcript lends credence to the notion she included herself.